Every week Kevin I publish my very own “Kev’s Column” online. This week I take a look at the situation in Ukraine:
The images of heavily armed men opening fire on demonstrators in Kiev was a haunting reminder of a time when much of Europe was ruled by puppet Dictators whose ability to call on the Red Army to crush their own people’s desires was the basis of their power.
The bloodshed on the streets of Ukraine as people called for political change in their own country has now given way to a crisis that could threaten the stability of Europe overall. Historical grievances, mixed with economic reality, political corruption and Vladimir Putin’s ambition for a Greater Russia have produced an explosive mix.
In considering this situation it is vital to remember that the 20th century history of Ukraine is a tortured one. From the terror famine under Stalin which saw millions die to facing the full onslaught of Operation Barbarossa, the Nazi invasion of the USSR. Millions of Russians sacrificed their lives to defeat Hitler, many today will be reminding their countrymen that when the invading German forces reached Ukraine in some places they meet with Bread & Salt, a traditional welcome, not fierce resistance.
Let’s be clear, there is no genuine prospect of this situation spiralling in the way the Balkans Crisis did in 1914. In a year that sees the 100th anniversary of the start of World War I it is tempting to draw parallels, yet there are key factors that mitigate against this. There is no appetite or desire for war in the western democracies and the Russian High Command knows a full military confrontation with NATO would be likely to produce a devastating defeat. This means that neither side will issue ultimatums or make military threats directly to each other that would lead the situation down that path.
It is interesting to note that at a time when some in the UK are advocating us leaving the EU this crisis started when Ukraine’s former president rejected a deal for closer ties with it in favour of a deal with Russia. The economy of the country is weak and has not seen the benefits of growth that many of the former eastern block states have seen since the Velvet Revolutions of 1989. It is also divided with the east heavily reliant on trade with Russia and the west looking to the EU for future prosperity. For those protesting a deal with the EU was a chance for a new economic future, not just a visible move away from Russian political influence.
The main flashpoint is now the Crimea where Russia has seized control by deploying thousands of troops into the peninsula, whilst at the same time inciting other groups to rise up against the new government in Ukraine. The restraint shown by the new Ukranian Government and Armed Forces so far is likely to be the decisive factor in avoiding open conflict there, but a situation where one shot could see two nations pulled into conflict is frightening. Talks should take priority, yet there is no sign Russia wishes to engage in them.
Whatever anyone’s view on the future identity of the Crimea it is unacceptable for such situations to be settled by a neighbouring country sending in its military to seize control first and engaging in talks later. Whilst a military response from the west would not be the right way forward, there does need to be a meaningful response that targets Russian economic interests beyond just strong words.
So what are the lessons for the UK in terms of policy?
First the situation in Ukraine is a reminder that our membership of NATO remains at the heart of our defence policy and strategy. The united power of the alliance makes an attack on a member state a foolhardy move for any potential aggressor. It is easy to think that the end of the Cold War removed the need for it, but with each threat that emerges it is vital the world’s key democracies stand together. The EU’s attempts on this issue have for me shown how the North Atlantic alliance is still the strongest option for Britain’s long term defence.
The second is that we must continue to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and resources from countries that are happy to use our reliance on them for their political ends. Germany gets 30% of its gas from Russia and therefore would find it almost impossible to take a tough stance on this issue without fearing a large economic impact. Those who argue Britain should just ignore this crisis may wish to consider the impact for domestic energy bills in the bay if wholesale gas prices across Europe were forced up by a shortage of supply from Russia.
There are no simple solutions to the current crisis in Ukraine, and the country will need western support to find economic stability. The alternative of just walking away would be to repeat the mistakes of the 1930’s when appeasement did not prevent a war, but made it all the more likely.